Allowed

Sanno @ Rabiya Khatoon v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC5 Nov 2024ABAIL/10616/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad granted anticipatory bail to the applicant in a domestic violence case involving allegations under Sections 498A and 304B IPC. The bail is conditional and valid until the submission of the police report under Section 173(2) CrPC.

What did the court decide?

Released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties.

Sanno @ Rabiya Khatoon vs State of U.P. — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:172597

¶2

Court No. - 67

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10616 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Sanno @ Rabiya Khatoon Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mirza Ali Zulfaqar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shashank Shekhar Pandey, learned AGA and perused the material placed on record.

¶7

This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 107 of 2024, under sections 498A, 304B IPC and Section 3/4 D.P.Act, Police Station Dumariyaganj, District Siddharth Nagar.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the married sister-in-law of the deceased and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The deceased was married with the brother of the applicant in the year 2019. In the alleged incident the brother of the applicant (husband of the deceased) has also received injuries, while trying to save the deceased. At the time of alleged incident, the applicant was living separately with her husband at Lucknow. It is next contended that the mother-in-law of the deceased Aaliya Begum has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 16.10.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 9788 of 2024 (Aaliya Begum Vs. State of U.P.). The applicant has no criminal antecedents. It is next submitted that the investigation is going on and the applicant has apprehension of her arrest in the above mentioned case.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the application for grant of anticipatory bail be confined only till the submission of the police report.

¶11

Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, in particular of the fact, that in the alleged incident the brother of the applicant (husband of the deceased) has also received injuries, the mother-in-law of the deceased Aaliya Begum has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report.

¶12

In the event of arrest, the applicant Sanno @ Rabiya Khatoon be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 173 (2) Cr.P.C. on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:

¶13

(i) the applicant shall make herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶14

(ii) the applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶15

(iii) the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if she has passport, the same shall be deposited by her before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶16

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶17

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order independently without being prejudiced by any observation made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

¶18

The applicant is directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order.

¶19

The application stands disposed of.

¶20

Order Date :- 5.11.2024/Lbm/-

¶21

Digitally signed by :- LAL BAHADUR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sanno @ Rabiya Khatoon v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanno @ Rabiya Khatoon v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shadab vs State of U.P.

Raja Ram vs State of U.P. and Another

Aas Mohammad vs State of Up and Another

Rafeeq Alias Kallu vs State of U.P. and Another

Kanhaiya Lal vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Guddi Alias Kavita and Another vs State of U.P.